Design and Implementation of an Adaptive, Integrated Approach to Health and Sustainability in a Smallholder-Dominated Agroecosystem - Integrated Assessment of Health and Sustainability of Agroecosystems - page 53

study. The main limitation to this is that the process is highly dependent on the com-
munities' capacity for collective action. Conceivably, absence of collective action
would cripple the communities' ability to participate, plan, take action, and reflect
on the outcomes of such actions. The effectiveness of methods such as soft systems
methodology in rebuilding communities' social capital and collective action remains
to be fully tested.
The AESH framework as applied in this study is remarkably similar to the sustain-
able livelihoods approach. Similarities include the holistic and systems approaches,
focus on the communities as partners in the process, community participation, and
seeking sustainable transformations of human activity systems to improve the well-
being of the people. AESH is a metaphor to structure how human beings should
think about their activities—social and economic—and their implication on the bio-
physical world not only to improve their well-being but also to conserve the natural
resource base on which their survival depends. The sustainable livelihood approach,
by contrast, seeks to develop an understanding of the factors that lie behind people's
choice of livelihood strategy, reinforce the positive aspects, and mitigate the negative
influences (DFID [Department for International Development], 2000). It presupposes
the existence of a consensus on what is positive and negative among the outsiders
and insiders, while its primary purpose is to enhance the outsiders' understanding
of the choices of the insider so that the outsiders can design and implement better
development interventions.
Agroecosystem health proposes a shift toward communities as the primary man-
agers of agroecosystems, with a colearning process in which insiders are experts on
the problem situation, while outsiders are experts on the methods. Together, they
function to create local theory to be used in a collegial process to improve the live-
lihoods of communities and the health and sustainability of agroecosystems as a
whole. The AESH framework therefore adds to traditional methods of integrated
community development by incorporating systems theory and practice, action
research concepts, and participatory as well as conventional research methods to
address potentially multiple and varied community-driven concerns. This allows a
more structured approach for addressing complex societal issues such as equity, gen-
der, and leadership roles.
In planning and implementation, communities are willing—and often need—to
enlist the advice and support of “outsiders” for addressing priority concerns. Specific
research questions may be posed (e.g., regarding water quality) or technical advice
requested (e.g., about specifications for water distribution or road construction). We
have also found that communities are receptive to learning from the experiences of
other communities, which is useful for providing both practical tips and motivation.
All of these are critical to the process of encouraging communities toward healthy
and more sustainable husbandry of agroecosystems and underscore the potential of
the AESH approach.

2.4.4 h e A l t h A n D s u is tA i n A b i l i it y A s s e s s m e n t

Although the methods and strategies used in this study provided important results,
it is difficult to assess how well they predict the health and sustainability of the